One of my pet peeves is the way that some people in the public eye are lacking in any sense of humour and how they almost go out of their way to be offended when someone takes the piss out of them, even when that ribbing is is entirely without animus. This is even worse in a country like my homeland where the politically correct have manged to have some of their wacky ideas enshrined in law.
Over here during the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras a highlight of the parade is the “dikes on bikes” where lesbian bikers show of their machines and themselves. The epithet “Dyke” certainly does not have to be construed as being a pejorative. So imaging how stupid it sounds that an openly lesbian TV presenter should take offence at being described as a “Dyke on a Bike” in relation to a TV program where she is cycling around Britain?
Clare Balding in north Devon in episode 1 of her new BBC show Britain by Bike Photograph: Bbc
Balding, who is gay, complained to the newspaper’s editor, John Witherow, about the tone of the article. But, she said, she was then even more horrified by his response.
Gill had written: “Some time ago, I made a cheap and frankly unnecessary joke about Clare Balding looking like a big lesbian. And afterwards somebody tugged my sleeve to point out that she is a big lesbian.”
After a mock apology, he continued: “Now back to the dyke on a bike, puffing up the nooks and crannies at the bottom end of the nation.”
Balding complained to Witherow. She was then “appalled” to receive a reply stating: “In my view some members of the gay community need to stop regarding themselves as having a special victim status and behave like any other sensible group that is accepted by society.
“Not having a privileged status means, of course, one must accept occasionally being the butt of jokes. A person’s sexuality should not give them a protected status.
I hope that this signals an end to the trepidation and fear that has greeted such spurious complaints in the past because as any sensible person knows it is never just the words that use that matter as much as the intention of the speaker. I am reminded of the importance having a sense of humour and frankly those who lack such a thing should avoid any sort of life in the limelight until they can find the good grace to appreciate that they will be mocked even more if they take self righteous umbridge at some good humoured and affectionate piss taking.
Cheers Comrades
If it’s okay by Len, I’ll make a comment because I think it’s a good post.
I agree that *some* things can be said in humour but where do you draw the line and how do you distinguish the real intent of the author? The author’s comments above do not sound very funny to me so it’s all very well for him to say is was all in fun, but if it’s not perceived that way it can indeed sound rather vicious, nasty & unnecessary. So should we call Andrew Bolt a “racist pig” in fun too? You see what I mean?
(Btw, I agree there’s a lot of victim status going on over the gay marriage issue and I wonder what the next ‘demand’ will be when the Greens get ther bill passed? Maybe a national apology?)
I’m pretty sure that there will be no apology, That was Rudd’s speciality and he won’t ever be anywhere near the lodge ever again!
But I wrote this post because it seems to me that what was said in the piece about normalization of attitudes to homosexuality meaning that the Likes of Clare Belting just has to wear a bit of piss taking if it has been done in a good humoured manner.
Of course the same goes for Labor supporters who will have to wear a lot ribbing the way things are looking at present